DOCSLIB.ORG

Risk Estimation of Uniparental Disomy of Chromosome 14 Or 15 in a Fetus with a Parent Carrying a Non-Homologous Robertsonian Translocation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Risk Estimation of Uniparental Disomy of Chromosome 14 Or 15 in a Fetus with a Parent Carrying a Non-Homologous Robertsonian Translocation Risk estimation of uniparental disomy of chromosome 14 or 15 in a fetus with a parent carrying a non-homologous Robertsonian translocation. Should we still perform prenatal diagnosis? Kamran Moradkhani, Laurence Cuisset, Pierre Boisseau, Olivier Pichon, Marine Lebrun, Houda Hamdi-rozé, Marie-Laure Maurin, Nicolas Gruchy, Marie-christine Manca-pellissier, Perrine Malzac, et al. To cite this version: Kamran Moradkhani, Laurence Cuisset, Pierre Boisseau, Olivier Pichon, Marine Lebrun, et al.. Risk estimation of uniparental disomy of chromosome 14 or 15 in a fetus with a parent carrying a non- homologous Robertsonian translocation. Should we still perform prenatal diagnosis?. Prenatal Diag- nosis, Wiley, 2019, 39 (11), pp.986-992. 10.1002/pd.5518. hal-02343373 HAL Id: hal-02343373 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02343373 Submitted on 11 Nov 2019 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Risk estimation of uniparental disomy of chromosome 14 or 15 in a fetus with a parent carrying a non-homologous Robertsonian translocation. Should we still perform prenatal diagnosis? Kamran MORADKHANI 1, Laurence CUISSET 2, Pierre BOISSEAU 1, Olivier PICHON 1, Marine LEBRUN 3, Houda HAMDI-ROZÉ 4, Marie-Laure MAURIN 5, Nicolas GRUCHY 6, Marie-Christine Manca-Pellissier 7, Perrine MALZAC 7, Frédéric BILAN 8, Marie-Pierre AUDREZET 9, Pascale SAUGIER-VEBER 10, Anne-Laure FAURET-Amsellem 11, Chantal MISSIRIAN 7, Paul KUENTZ 12, Gregory EGEA 13, Agnès GUICHET 14, Isabelle CREVEAUX 15, Renaud TOURAINE 3, Carole GOUMY 16,17, Nicole JOYÉ 18, Jacques PUECHBERTY 19, Emmanuelle HAQUET 19, Sandra CHANTOT-BASTARAUD 20, Sébastien SCHMITT 1, Philippe GOSSET 21, Bénédicte DUBAN-BEDU 22, Bruno DELOBEL 22, Philippe VAGO 15,16, François VIALARD 23,24, Denise MOLINA GOMES 23,24, Jean-Pierre SIFFROI 18, Jean-Paul BONNEFONT 5, Jean-Michel DUPONT 25, Philippe JONVEAUX 26, Martine DOCO-FENZY 27, Damien SANLAVILLE 28,29, Cédric LE CAIGNEC 1 1- CHU Nantes, Service de Génétique Médicale, Nantes, France. 2- Laboratory of genetics and molecular biology, Institut Cochin and Cochin Hospital, APHP, Paris Descartes University, Paris 3- Service de Génétique – Laboratoire de biologie moléculaire – CHU Saint-Etienne 4- Department of Molecular Genetics and Genomics, CHU Rennes, Rennes, France. 5- Service d’Histologie, Embryologie, Cytogénétique. Groupe Hospitalier Necker-Enfants Malades 6- Service de Génétique, CHU Caen, Université Caen Normandie 7- Département de génétique médicale, Assistance Publique- Hôpitaux de Marseille 8- Service de génétique, CHU de Poitiers, Poitiers, France 9- Laboratoire de Génétique Moléculaire, CHRU, INSERM U1078, Brest, France 10- Department of Genetics, Normandy Centre for Genomic Medicine and Personalized Medicine, Rouen University Hospital, Rouen, France. 11- Department of Genetics, Robert-Debré Teaching Hospital, Assistance Publique- Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France. 12- Génétique Biologique Histologie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Besançon, F-25000, Besançon, France. 13- Laboratoire de biologie médicale GEN-BIO, Clermont-Ferrand, France. 14- Service de Génétique, CHU Angers 15- Laboratoire de biochimie médicale et biologie moléculaire, Centre de Biologie , Clermont- Ferrand, France 16- Cytogénétique Médicale, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand, France 17- Université Clermont Auvergne, INSERM, U1240 Imagerie Moléculaire et Stratégies Théranostiques, Clermont-Ferrand, France 18- Sorbonne Université, INSERM, Physiopathologie des Maladies Génétiques d’Expression Pédiatrique, F-75012 Paris, France 19- Département de Génétique Médicale, Maladies Rares et Médecine Personnalisée, Hôpital Arnaud de Villeneuve, CHU de Montpellier 20- INSERM, Physiopathologie des Maladies Génétiques d’Expression Pédiatrique, F-75012 Paris, France. 21- Laboratoire de diagnostic génétique, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France. 22- Centre de Génétique Chromosomique, GH de l'Institut Catholique de Lille - Hopital Saint Vincent de Paul, Lille, France. 23- Unité de Cytoénétique, CHI de Poissy St Germain en Laye, 78300 Poissy, France 24- EA7404-GIG, UFR des Sciences de la Santé Simone Veil, UVSQ, 78180 Montigny le bretonneux, France. 25- Laboratoire de Cytogénétique, HUPC hôpital Cochin, APHP ; Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France. 26- Laboratoire de génétique, CHRU Nancy, Inserm U1256, Université de Lorraine, Nancy, France. 27- Service de Génétique, CHU REIMS, EA3801, UFR de Médecine REIMS, France. 28- Department of Genetics, Lyon University Hospitals, Lyon, France 29- Claude Bernard Lyon I University; Lyon Neuroscience Research Centre, CNRS UMR5292, Inserm U1028, Lyon, France. ABSTRACT Uniparental disomy (UPD) testing is currently recommended during pregnancy in fetuses carrying a balanced Robertsonian translocation (ROB) involving chromosome 14 or 15, both chromosomes containing imprinted genes. The overall risk that such a fetus presents a UPD has been previously estimated to be around 0.6-0.8%. However, because UPD are rare events and this estimate has been calculated from a number of studies of limited size, we have reevaluated the risk of UPD in fetuses for whom one of the parents was known to carry a nonhomologous ROB (NHROB). We focused our multicentric study on NHROB involving chromosome 14 and/or 15. A total of 1747 UPD testing were performed in fetuses during pregnancy for the presence of UPD(14) and/or UPD(15). All fetuses were negative except one with a UPD(14) associated to a maternally inherited rob(13;14). Considering these data, the risk of UPD following prenatal diagnosis of an inherited ROB involving chromosome 14 and/or 15 could be estimated to be around 0.06%, far less than the previous estimation. Importantly, the risk of miscarriage following an invasive prenatal sampling is higher than the risk of UPD. Therefore, we do not recommend prenatal testing for UPD(15)mat, UPD(14)mat, UPD(14)pat for these pregnancies and parents should be reassured. Sonographic examination will help detecting the extremely rare fetuses with Prader-Willi, Kagami-Ogata or Temple syndrome. Given the fact that no sonographic features can reliably detect fetuses with Angelman syndrome, a prenatal invasive sampling to test UPD(15)pat could be discussed with future parents. Keywords: Uniparental disomy (UPD), UPD of chromosome 14 and 15, UPD(14), UPD(15), Inherited Robertsonian Translocation, Trisomy rescue, monosomy rescue, Gametic complementation Introduction Uniparental disomy (UPD) occurs when both copies of a chromosome, or part of a chromosome, are derived from a single parent. UPD is called heterodisomy when a pair of non- identical chromosomes is inherited from one parent or isodisomy when a single chromosome from one parent is duplicated. UPD may have clinical relevance for several reasons. Isodisomy leads to large blocks of homozygosity, which may lead to the uncovering of recessive alleles. Either isodisomy or heterodisomy can disrupt parent-specific imprinted genes, resulting in imprinting disorders, among them the well-known Prader-Willi (PWS; OMIM 176270) and Angelman (AS; OMIM 105830) syndromes for chromosome 15. PWS is characterized by short stature, obesity, hypogonadism, and learning difficulty. Approximately 70% of individuals with PWS carry a microdeletion at 15q11q13 of the paternally derived homolog. Most (25 %) of the remaining patients with PWS have maternal UPD(15). AS is characterized by severe learning difficulties, epilepsy and ataxic gait. Approximately 70% of individuals with AS carry an interstitial microdeletion of the same 15q11q13 region as in PWS, but in this case on the maternally derived homolog. About 2% of the remaining patients present paternal UPD(15). Three different mechanisms explain UPD: (i) trisomy rescue (ii) monosomy rescue and (iii) gametic complementation [1]. However, the main mechanism responsible for UPD is trisomy rescue mostly related to advanced maternal age [2]. This is highlighted by the higher proportion of maternal UPD to the etiology of PWS compared to that of paternal UPD to the etiology of AS (25% versus 2%). Apart advanced maternal age, any condition predisposing to aneuploid gametes increases the risk for UPD. Therefore, individuals carrying a balanced Robertsonian translocation (ROB) have an increased risk of aneuploid embryos, miscarriages and UPD following trisomy rescue. UPD testing is currently recommended in fetuses carrying a balanced ROB involving chromosome 14 or 15 [1]. Thus, most of the cytogenetic laboratories follow this recommendation and some of them attempted to estimate the risk of UPD following prenatal diagnosis of a ROB involving chromosome 14 or 15 [3,4,5,6,7,8]. From these combined data, the overall risk that a fetus with a non-homologous ROB (NHROB) presents a UPD has been estimated to be around 0.6-0.8% [9]. However, because UPD are rare events and this estimate has been calculated from a number of studies of limited size, we have reevaluated the risk of UPD in fetuses for whom one of the parents was known to carry a NHROB. We focused our multicentric study on NHROB
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Robertsonian Translocations FTNW
    Robertsonian Translocations rarechromo.org Robertsonian translocations A Robertsonian translocation is an unusual type of chromosome rearrangement caused by two particular chromosomes joining together. Out of every 1,000 newborn babies, one has a Robertsonian translocation. The phrase Robertsonian translocation is too long for normal conversation and many people shorten it to rob . When the translocation is balanced , the person with it is called a Robertsonian translocation carrier . As carriers are healthy and have a normal lifespan, many never discover about their unusual chromosome rearrangement. In fact, the translocation can be passed down in families for many generations without anyone discovering. An unbalanced Robertsonian translocation may come to light after a baby is born with a chromosome disorder. Most babies with unbalanced Robertsonian translocations have parents with normal chromosomes. A minority of babies have one parent who is a Robertsonian translocation carrier. What are chromosomes? Chromosomes are the microscopically small structures in the nucleus of the body’s cells that carry genes. These genes are the instructions that tell our bodies how to develop and work properly. We have 46 chromosomes in all, 23 inherited from our father and 23 from our mother. Each chromosome has a short arm and a long arm. Five of the 23 chromosomes have a very small short arm that contains no unique genes; these are chromosome 13, 14, 15, 21 and 22. Technically, they are called acrocentric chromosomes. In a Robertsonian translocation, two of the five acrocentric chromosomes have . broken at the beginning of the short arm near the point where it meets the long arm.
    [Show full text]
  • Sema4 Noninvasive Prenatal Select
    Sema4 Noninvasive Prenatal Select Noninvasive prenatal testing with targeted genome counting 2 Autosomal trisomies 5 Trisomy 21 (Down syndrome) 6 Trisomy 18 (Edwards syndrome) 7 Trisomy 13 (Patau syndrome) 8 Trisomy 16 9 Trisomy 22 9 Trisomy 15 10 Sex chromosome aneuploidies 12 Monosomy X (Turner syndrome) 13 XXX (Trisomy X) 14 XXY (Klinefelter syndrome) 14 XYY 15 Microdeletions 17 22q11.2 deletion 18 1p36 deletion 20 4p16 deletion (Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome) 20 5p15 deletion (Cri-du-chat syndrome) 22 15q11.2-q13 deletion (Angelman syndrome) 22 15q11.2-q13 deletion (Prader-Willi syndrome) 24 11q23 deletion (Jacobsen Syndrome) 25 8q24 deletion (Langer-Giedion syndrome) 26 Turnaround time 27 Specimen and shipping requirements 27 2 Noninvasive prenatal testing with targeted genome counting Sema4’s Noninvasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT)- Targeted Genome Counting analyzes genetic information of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) through a simple maternal blood draw to determine the risk for common aneuploidies, sex chromosomal abnormalities, and microdeletions, in addition to fetal gender, as early as nine weeks gestation. The test uses paired-end next-generation sequencing technology to provide higher depth across targeted regions. It also uses a laboratory-specific statistical model to help reduce false positive and false negative rates. The test can be offered to all women with singleton, twins and triplet pregnancies, including egg donor. The conditions offered are shown in below tables. For multiple gestation pregnancies, screening of three conditions
    [Show full text]
  • Fragile X Syndrome
    216 Current Genomics, 2011, 12, 216-224 Fragile X Syndrome Yingratana McLennan1, Jonathan Polussa1, Flora Tassone1,2 and Randi Hagerman*,1,3 1Medical Investigation of Neurodevelopmental Disorders (M.I.N.D.) Institute, University of California Davis Health System, Sacramento, California, USA 2Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Medicine, University of California Davis, School of Medicine, Davis, California, USA 3Department of Pediatrics, University of California Davis Health System, Sacramento, California, USA Abstract: Recent data from a national survey highlighted a significant difference in obesity rates in young fragile X males (31%) compared to age matched controls (18%). Fragile X syndrome (FXS) is the most common cause of intellectual disability in males and the most common single gene cause of autism. This X-linked disorder is caused by an expansion of a trinucleotide CGG repeat (>200) on the promotor region of the fragile X mental retardation 1 gene (FMR1). As a result, the promotor region often becomes methylated which leads to a deficiency or absence of the FMR1 protein (FMRP). Common characteristics of FXS include mild to severe cognitive impairments in males but less severe cognitive impairment in females. Physical features of FXS include an elongated face, prominent ears, and post-pubertal macroorchidism. Severe obesity in full mutation males is often associated with the Prader-Willi phenotype (PWP) which includes hyperphagia, lack of satiation after meals, and hypogonadism or delayed puberty; however, there is no deletion at 15q11-q13 nor uniparental maternal disomy. Herein, we discuss the molecular mechanisms leading to FXS and the Prader-Willi phenotype with an emphasis on mouse FMR1 knockout studies that have shown the reversal of weight increase through mGluR antagonists.
    [Show full text]
  • Inheriting Genetic Conditions
    Help Me Understand Genetics Inheriting Genetic Conditions Reprinted from MedlinePlus Genetics U.S. National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health Department of Health & Human Services Table of Contents 1 What does it mean if a disorder seems to run in my family? 1 2 Why is it important to know my family health history? 4 3 What are the different ways a genetic condition can be inherited? 6 4 If a genetic disorder runs in my family, what are the chances that my children will have the condition? 15 5 What are reduced penetrance and variable expressivity? 18 6 What do geneticists mean by anticipation? 19 7 What are genomic imprinting and uniparental disomy? 20 8 Are chromosomal disorders inherited? 22 9 Why are some genetic conditions more common in particular ethnic groups? 23 10 What is heritability? 24 Reprinted from MedlinePlus Genetics (https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/) i Inheriting Genetic Conditions 1 What does it mean if a disorder seems to run in my family? A particular disorder might be described as “running in a family” if more than one person in the family has the condition. Some disorders that affect multiple family members are caused by gene variants (also known as mutations), which can be inherited (passed down from parent to child). Other conditions that appear to run in families are not causedby variants in single genes. Instead, environmental factors such as dietary habits, pollutants, or a combination of genetic and environmental factors are responsible for these disorders. It is not always easy to determine whether a condition in a family is inherited.
    [Show full text]
  • Mosaic Genome-Wide Maternal Isodiploidy: an Extreme Form Of
    Bens et al. Clinical Epigenetics (2017) 9:111 DOI 10.1186/s13148-017-0410-y RESEARCH Open Access Mosaic genome-wide maternal isodiploidy: an extreme form of imprinting disorder presenting as prenatal diagnostic challenge Susanne Bens1*, Manuel Luedeke1, Tanja Richter1, Melanie Graf1, Julia Kolarova1, Gotthold Barbi1, Krisztian Lato2, Thomas F. Barth3 and Reiner Siebert1 Abstract Background: Uniparental disomy of certain chromosomes are associated with a group of well-known genetic syndromes referred to as imprinting disorders. However, the extreme form of uniparental disomy affecting the whole genome is usually not compatible with life, with the exception of very rare cases of patients with mosaic genome-wide uniparental disomy reported in the literature. Results: We here report on a fetus with intrauterine growth retardation and malformations observed on prenatal ultrasound leading to invasive prenatal testing. By cytogenetic (conventional karyotyping), molecular cytogenetic (QF-PCR, FISH, array), and methylation (MS-MLPA) analyses of amniotic fluid, we detected mosaicism for one cell line with genome-wide maternal uniparental disomy and a second diploid cell line of biparental inheritance with trisomy X due to paternal isodisomy X. As expected for this constellation, we observed DNA methylation changes at all imprinted loci investigated. Conclusions: This report adds new information on phenotypic outcome of mosaic genome-wide maternal uniparental disomy leading to an extreme form of multilocus imprinting disturbance. Moreover, the findings highlight the technical challenges of detecting these rare chromosome disorders prenatally. Keywords: Genome-wide maternal uniparental disomy, Imprinting, Prenatal diagnostics, DNA methylation, Multilocus imprinting disturbances Background of isodisomy include unmasking of recessive diseases by Uniparental disomy (UPD) refers to the constellation of two transmitting two affected gene copies from one heterozy- identical (isodisomy) or homologous (heterodisomy) chro- gous parent carrier [2].
    [Show full text]
  • PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS of PATERNAL UNIPARENTAL ISODISOMY of CHROMOSOME 14 (Patiupd14) with CHROMOSOMAL MICRO-ARRAY in a FETUS with MULTIPLE CONGENITAL ABNORMALITIES
    PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS OF PATERNAL UNIPARENTAL ISODISOMY OF CHROMOSOME 14 (patiUPD14) WITH CHROMOSOMAL MICRO-ARRAY IN A FETUS WITH MULTIPLE CONGENITAL ABNORMALITIES Bazin A1, Trost D1, Kleinfinger P1, Lohmann L1, Bessieres B² , Guis F3 1 Département de Génétique, Laboratoire Cerba , St Ouen l’Aumone France -2 Hôpital Necker-Enfants Malades, Paris, France - 3 Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France CASE REPORT DISCUSSION The phenotype of neonatal patUPD14 -like syndrome is now well known: The patient, a 43 years old primigravida woman, was referred at 12 weeks polyhydramnios, pathognomonic short “coat-hanger” thorax, dysmorphic of gestation for prenatal diagnosis because of an increased nuchal features, diastasis recti, developmental delay and poor prognosis which translucency at ultrasound (3.8 mm, CRL 59 mm). The karyotype on explains the high frequency in spontaneous miscarriages: 1/81. uncultured chorionic villi was normal: 46,XX (15 cells, RHG banding). There Prenatal features are less evident. Twenty four neonatal cases have been were no particularities in the familial history nor consanguinity. reported (Table 1): among prenatal findings , polyhydramnios was present Chromosomal Micro-Array Analysis (CMA) was performed with in 22/24, atypical omphalocele in 4/24 , short thorax in 8/24, and “coat- PrecytoNEM (derived from Agilent 60K, resolution 400 Kb) and didn’t show hanger “ ribs was prenatally demonstrated only in the two more recent any unbalanced abnormality. cases. In about half of the cases, karyotype was abnormal with balanced At 23 WG, a subsequent ultrasound showed multiple abnormalities : robertsonian translocations involving one chromosome 14 and , in one polyhydramnios, generalized oedema, dysmorphic features with long case, a mosaïc supernumerary marker chromosome 14.
    [Show full text]
  • Copy-Neutral Loss of Heterozygosity and Chromosome Gains and Losses
    Lourenço et al. Molecular Cancer 2014, 13:246 http://www.molecular-cancer.com/content/13/1/246 RESEARCH Open Access Copy-neutral loss of heterozygosity and chromosome gains and losses are frequent in gastrointestinal stromal tumors Nelson Lourenço1,10†, Zofia Hélias-Rodzewicz1,2†, Jean-Baptiste Bachet1,3, Sabrina Brahimi-Adouane1, Fabrice Jardin4, Jeanne Tran van Nhieu5, Frédérique Peschaud1,6, Emmanuel Martin7, Alain Beauchet1,8, Frédéric Chibon9 and Jean-François Emile1,2* Abstract Background: A KIT gain of function mutation is present in 70% of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) and the wild-type (WT) allele is deleted in 5 to 15% of these cases. The WT KIT is probably deleted during GIST progression. We aimed to identify the mechanism of WT KIT loss and to determine whether other genes are involved or affected. Methods: Whole-genome SNP array analyses were performed in 22 GISTs with KIT exon 11 mutations, including 11 with WT loss, to investigate the mechanisms of WT allele deletion. CGH arrays and FISH were performed in some cases. Common genetic events were identified by SNP data analysis. The 9p21.3 locus was studied by multiplex quantification of genomic DNA. Results: Chromosome instability involving the whole chromosome/chromosome arm (whole C/CA) was detected in 21/22 cases. The GISTs segregated in two groups based on their chromosome number: polyGISTs had numerous whole C/CA gains (mean 23, range [9 to 43]/3.11 [1 to 5]), whereas biGISTs had fewer aberrations. Whole C/CA losses were also frequent and found in both groups. There were numerous copy-neutral losses of heterozygosity (cnLOH) of whole C/CA in both polyGIST (7/9) and biGIST (9/13) groups.
    [Show full text]
  • Maternal Uniparental Disomy of Chromosome 20 (UPD(20)Mat) As Differential Diagnosis of Silver Russell Syndrome: Identification of Three New Cases
    G C A T T A C G G C A T genes Article Maternal Uniparental Disomy of Chromosome 20 (UPD(20)mat) as Differential Diagnosis of Silver Russell Syndrome: Identification of Three New Cases Pierpaola Tannorella 1 , Daniele Minervino 1 , Sara Guzzetti 1, Alessandro Vimercati 1, Luciano Calzari 1 , Giuseppa Patti 2,3, Mohamad Maghnie 2,3 , Anna Elsa Maria Allegri 2, Donatella Milani 4 , Giulietta Scuvera 4,5, Milena Mariani 6, Piergiorgio Modena 7, Angelo Selicorni 6, Lidia Larizza 1 and Silvia Russo 1,* 1 Research Laboratory of Medical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics, IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano, 20095 Milan, Italy; [email protected] (P.T.); [email protected] (D.M.); [email protected] (S.G.); [email protected] (A.V.); [email protected] (L.C.); [email protected] (L.L.) 2 Department of Pediatrics, IRCCS Istituto Giannina Gaslini, 16147 Genova, Italy; [email protected] (G.P.); [email protected] (M.M.); [email protected] (A.E.M.A.) 3 Department of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health (DINOGMI), University of Genova, 16132 Genova, Italy 4 Pediatric Highly Intensive Care Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, 20122 Milan, Italy; [email protected] (D.M.); [email protected] (G.S.) 5 Medical Genetics Unit, Woman-Child-Newborn Department, Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda-Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, via Francesco Sforza 28, 20122 Milan, Italy 6 UOC Pediatria, ASST Lariana, 22100 Como, Italy; [email protected] (M.M.); Citation: Tannorella, P.; Minervino, [email protected] (A.S.) D.; Guzzetti, S.; Vimercati, A.; Calzari, 7 SOS-ID Laboratorio di Genetica, ASST Lariana, 22100 Como, Italy; [email protected] L.; Patti, G.; Maghnie, M.; Allegri, * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +39-0261-9113-036 A.E.M.; Milani, D.; Scuvera, G.; et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Chromosomal Disorders
    Understanding Genetic Tests and How They Are Used David Flannery,MD Medical Director American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics Starting Points • Genes are made of DNA and are carried on chromosomes • Genetic disorders are the result of alteration of genetic material • These changes may or may not be inherited Objectives • To explain what variety of genetic tests are now available • What these tests entail • What the different tests can detect • How to decide which test(s) is appropriate for a given clinical situation Types of Genetic Tests . Cytogenetic . (Chromosomes) . DNA . Metabolic . (Biochemical) Chromosome Test (Karyotype) How a Chromosome test is Performed Medicaldictionary.com Use of Karyotype http://medgen.genetics.utah.e du/photographs/diseases/high /peri001.jpg Karyotype Detects Various Chromosome Abnormalities • Aneuploidy- to many or to few chromosomes – Trisomy, Monosomy, etc. • Deletions – missing part of a chromosome – Partial monosomy • Duplications – extra parts of chromosomes – Partial trisomy • Translocations – Balanced or unbalanced Karyotyping has its Limits • Many deletions or duplications that are clinically significant are not visible on high-resolution karyotyping • These are called “microdeletions” or “microduplications” Microdeletions or microduplications are detected by FISH test • Fluorescence In situ Hybridization FISH fluorescent in situ hybridization: (FISH) A technique used to identify the presence of specific chromosomes or chromosomal regions through hybridization (attachment) of fluorescently-labeled DNA probes to denatured chromosomal DNA. Step 1. Preparation of probe. A probe is a fluorescently-labeled segment of DNA comlementary to a chromosomal region of interest. Step 2. Hybridization. Denatured chromosomes fixed on a microscope slide are exposed to the fluorescently-labeled probe. Hybridization (attachment) occurs between the probe and complementary (i.e., matching) chromosomal DNA.
    [Show full text]
  • Frequent Occurrence of Uniparental Disomy in Colorectal Cancer
    Carcinogenesis vol.28 no.1 pp.38–48, 2007 doi:10.1093/carcin/bgl086 Advance Access publication June 13, 2006 Frequent occurrence of uniparental disomy in colorectal cancer Claus Lindbjerg Andersen, Carsten Wiuf, Introduction Mogens Kruhøffer, Marianne Korsgaard, Søren Laurberg and Torben Falck Ørntoftà The development and progression of colorectal cancer (CRC) is a multistep process leading to an accumulation of genomic 1Molecular Diagnostic Laboratory, Department of Clinical Biochemistry, alterations (1,2). The nature of these alterations varies from Aarhus University Hospital, Skejby DK-8200, Aarhus N, Denmark, minute point mutations to gross chromosomal rearrange- 2Bioinformatics Research Center (BiRC), University of Aarhus, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark and 3Department of Surgery, THG, ments. In particular, recurrent alterations are thought to be Aarhus University Hospital, DK-8000, Aarhus C, Denmark important for tumor pathogenesis (3). Several studies have ÃTo whom correspondence and requests for reprints should be addressed. focused on mapping genomic alterations occurring recur- Tel: +45 89495100; Fax: +45 89496018; rently in CRC, commonly using genome-wide technologies Email: [email protected] like either comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) or loss We used SNP arrays to identify and characterize genomic of heterozygosity (LOH) analysis (4–6). These methods alterations associated with colorectal cancer (CRC). Laser identify regions experiencing an altered DNA copy number microdissected cancer cells from 15 adenocarinomas were or LOH. Importantly, results obtained by either method are investigated by Affymetrix Mapping 10K SNP arrays. negatively influenced by factors like normal cell contamina- Analysis of the data extracted from the SNP arrays tion and intratumor heterogeneity. Normal cell contamination revealed multiple regions with copy number alterations occurs because tumor tissues are only rarely homogenous, and loss of heterozygosity (LOH).
    [Show full text]
  • Uniparental Disomy (UPD)
    How did this happen? UPD test UPD cannot be identified by looking at chromosomes under a microscope since the number There are a number of different ways that UPD can and appearance of chromosomes will not be affected. occur. It can happen due to a random event during the A molecular test is used to establish the inheritance formation of egg and sperm cells, or after conception pattern of each chromosome (or part of a chromosome) (when an egg is fertilised by a sperm). such as microsatellite analysis or SNP (single Formation of eggs and sperm nucleotide polymorphism) genotyping. These techniques make use of the fact that each chromosome Eggs and sperm are usually produced with a single copy of each individual contains small DNA sequence of each chromosome. Occasionally an egg or sperm are variations. A set of markers for each chromosome are produced that are missing a chromosome or have an analysed. The presence of the same markers across extra copy of a chromosome (or part of a chromosome). entire chromosome pairs suggests UPD with identical The extra chromosome copy can be identical to an chromosomes. If different variations are identified existing chromosome or it can be slightly different since along the length of each chromosome in a pair, it we inherit slightly different chromosomes from each suggests that one chromosome has been inherited parent. When chromosome pairs come together during from each parent. The same tests are used to identify the formation of eggs and sperm, they exchange genetic UPD with non-identical chromosomes and partial UPD, material and therefore are not an exact replica of either when a section of a chromosome has UPD.
    [Show full text]
  • A Search for Uniparental Disomy in Carriers of Supernumerary Marker
    Original Paper Eur J Hum Genet 1995;3:21-26 R.S. Jamesa A Search for Uniparental Disomy I. K. Templeb N.R. Dennis'0 in Carriers of Supernumerary J. A. Crollaa Marker Chromosomes a Wessex Regional Genetics Laboratory, Salisbury District Hospital, Salisbury, and 1608224 b Wessex Clinical Genetics Service, Princess Anne Hospital, Southampton, UK Keywords Abstract Uniparental disomy As there is some evidence that individuals bearing supernu­ Isodisomy merary marker chromosomes (SMCs) might have an increased Supernumerary marker risk of being uniparentally disomie for the structurally normal chromosomes homologues of the SMC, we made a systematic search for uni­ Imprinting parental disomy of the autosomal homologues from which SMCs were derived. Of the 22 families studied, a biparental origin of the normal homologues was demonstrated in 21, and 1 case of paternal isodisomy of chromosome 6 was detected in the carrier of a supernumerary marker ring chromosome 6 which itself was of maternal origin. Our results confirm that uniparental disomy may be found in association with SMCs, but until more cases are studied we can only speculate on their frequency and the mechanism(s) which result in this phenom­ enon. Introduction chromosome disjunction resulting in aneu- ploidy, and it has been shown that an in­ Supernumerary marker chromosomes creased incidence of aneuploidy is associated (SMCs) are detected in <0.1% of the general with an increased risk of uniparental disomy population, but in 0.327% of the mentally (UPD) by mechanisms of aneuploidy correc­ retarded [1]. Ramos et al. [2] and Buckton et tion [3, 4], al. [1] have suggested that the presence of a The first hypothesis suggesting a link be­ SMC at meiosis may interfere with normal tween a SMC and UPD was that of Robinson Received: July 12, 1994 Mrs.
    [Show full text]